Re: Hashed Timelock Agreements (HTLAs)

I think the HTLA concept would be best used in explaining this to a more
blockchain-y audience (maybe even in an "Interledger for Blockchainers"
post?). I'd probably stick to talking about "conditional transfers" for
others but I'm open to suggestions!
We've been working a lot on ilp-plugin-virtual, which basically implements
the original trustline concept between two parties. Ben Sharafian is
currently working on a refactor that would allow the same plugin code to be
used for a trustline or payment channels. That'll make it easier to write
those plugins and easier for users to choose how they want to set up their
agreements.

On Thu, Jun 22, 2017, 8:08 AM Ryan Fugger <arv@ryanfugger.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 3:09 AM, Evan Schwartz <evan@ripple.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> What do you think? Does HTLA get the point across? (If this idea seems
>> interesting or could use more explanation I could write up a full blog post
>> about it)
>>
>>
> I like this and think it gets the idea across effectively.  You should try
> it out on people whose brain isn't already filled with this stuff though to
> be sure.  Where were you thinking of using it?
>
> I've always liked the idea that any two parties can formalize their own
> settlement agreement and make it legally binding just by writing it up and
> signing it (on paper, with ink), or putting in an online service's terms
> for its users.  No fancy distributed ledger stuff needed. I think this
> could appeal to a whole swath of developers who are (rightly) intimidated
> by blockchains and smart contracts, especially if there's an easy-to-use
> little ILP library they can plug right in.
>
-- 

Evan Schwartz
Software Engineer
Managing Director of Ripple Luxembourg
<http:> <http:>